Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[Judge Pen]

I have often heard people refer to the "books" that people find with the material in them, but no one has ever shown me one, or told me where I can see it for myself. Can you (or anyone else) show me, refer me, or point me to a place, to see such books containing SD material?

Our Hsing Ie, Pa Kua and Tai Chi are all reproduced in books. As is our 5 animal form. I have not seen any reporduction of our lower belt material (which is what The claims to have a copyright on).

[kwaichang]

So if I won a fight while doing SD I guess I didnt really win since I was doing SD ??? Right ? KC

[David Jamieson]

So if I won a fight while doing SD I guess I didnt really win since I was doing SD ??? Right ? KC

Go win a fight first, then say what you like. That's how it is.

[kwaichang]

Must have worded it wrong, I did win many fights so I guess I really didnt LOL. KC

[bodhi warrior]

If you watch this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOi63m2nwbM

and can't tell it was made up in someone's living room while NCIS was on, you deserve to be duped.

Someone made a comment about the knee slapping. Slapping of the knees, elbows, is pretty common among indonesian kuntao systems.
Maybe in the end it is a kuntao system after all.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Someone made a comment about the knee slapping. Slapping of the knees, elbows, is pretty common among indonesian kuntao systems.
Maybe in the end it is a kuntao system after all.

That has been my suspicion all along actually. It may be a badly taught one, but I really do suspect that is what it is.

[One student]

Our Hsing Ie, Pa Kua and Tai Chi are all reproduced in books. As is our 5 animal form. I have not seen any reporduction of our lower belt material (which is what The claims to have a copyright on).

I have seen books on "basic" Yang Style Tai Chi, and the form is very similar, some books more than others. Also, I've been told there is a famous book with a form also very similar to our "Classical" Pa Kua. I've seen video from Asia of persons doing Hsing Ie, being the 5 fists and the 12 animals, also very similar to SD. I took a Hsing Ie seminar (non-SD) and it was only the 5 fists, and again was very similar to SD.

Which always made me ask: Did SD come from those, did those come from SD, or did they both originate from some other common source?

I guess one would hope that if it were "real" forms, of something that universal, the form done in one place would look something like the form done somewhere else, if it is all the same Style.

So, I've always wanted to see a book, in print before GMS taught the material, with the material or something so close too it that it had to have common sources or one come from the other -- and something that is not so universal as to be less likely to be material actually taught by common schools (in other words, that the author learned it the same way GMS did, in the heirarchy at least).

Of course, seeing it in a book does not mean it came from the book, but it does raise a good question.

[bodhi warrior]

I have seen books on "basic" Yang Style Tai Chi, and the form is very similar, some books more than others. Also, I've been told there is a famous book with a form also very similar to our "Classical" Pa Kua. I've seen video from Asia of persons doing Hsing Ie, being the 5 fists and the 12 animals, also very similar to SD. I took a Hsing Ie seminar (non-SD) and it was only the 5 fists, and again was very similar to SD.

Which always made me ask: Did SD come from those, did those come from SD, or did they both originate from some other common source?

I guess one would hope that if it were "real" forms, of something that universal, the form done in one place would look something like the form done somewhere else, if it is all the same Style.


So, I've always wanted to see a book, in print before GMS taught the material, with the material or something so close too it that it had to have common sources or one come from the other -- and something that is not so universal as to be less likely to be material actually taught by common schools (in other words, that the author learned it the same way GMS did, in the heirarchy at least).

Of course, seeing it in a book does not mean it came from the book, but it does raise a good question.

Our "classical" pa kua is Jiang Rongqiao's original form. His book was originally published in 1963. There are a couple of translations available.

[Leto]

I have seen books on "basic" Yang Style Tai Chi, and the form is very similar, some books more than others. Also, I've been told there is a famous book with a form also very similar to our "Classical" Pa Kua. I've seen video from Asia of persons doing Hsing Ie, being the 5 fists and the 12 animals, also very similar to SD. I took a Hsing Ie seminar (non-SD) and it was only the 5 fists, and again was very similar to SD.

Which always made me ask: Did SD come from those, did those come from SD, or did they both originate from some other common source?

I guess one would hope that if it were "real" forms, of something that universal, the form done in one place would look something like the form done somewhere else, if it is all the same Style.

So, I've always wanted to see a book, in print before GMS taught the material, with the material or something so close too it that it had to have common sources or one come from the other -- and something that is not so universal as to be less likely to be material actually taught by common schools (in other words, that the author learned it the same way GMS did, in the heirarchy at least).

Of course, seeing it in a book does not mean it came from the book, but it does raise a good question.

We've been over this many times.
This is what I think is crazy. Long time students don't even know where the forms they have learned came from, or if there are any other styles or schools which practice them. I didn't either, when I first started, but a little research and talking to people revealed more facts.
Jiang Rong Qiao's book is titled "Baguazhang Lian Xi Fa". It includes the "rules of bagua", which in our CSC manual were broken down into 64 rules. It has been quite helpful to me in correcting some of the movements I was taught incorrectly.

The eight animal form I have only been able to find taught by Jerry Alan Johnson on his old video instruction series from the 80's, of which clips are available on youtube and elsewhere. Based on the way he teaches the Jiang Rong Qiao form, I would say he didn't get it from Sin The. There is a possibility Sin The got something from him, though.

The Yang style taijiquan form, which out east you guys call the 64, is Cheng Man Ching's 37 posture form, an abbreviated version of the classical Yang style form of Yang Cheng Fu. It is published in a book called "Master Cheng's New Method of Taichi Ch'uan Self-Cultivation", and probably elsewhere as well. The 24 posture form we learned is the standard 24 posture simplified tai chi form taught everywhere, sometimes called the Beijing form. It is also based on movements from the classical Yang style form of Yang Cheng Fu (not combined styles, as I was told when learning it, that is a different form). I am sure that has been published in numerous forms by numerous people since it was invented in the 1950's.
I don't know where the Chen 83 posture is published, because I never got a chance to take that seminar and actually see the form.
Most Xingyiquan is very similar, across school and styles, especially the five elements. The animals have a bit more variety. I am not sure which branch of xingyiquan ours is supposed to be, but it seems most likely Hebei branch. It is definately not Henan/Xinyi LiuHe quan. I've been learning a lot about xingyi and bagua from watching Luo Jinhua of Sha Guozheng's style, who was a student of Jiang Rongqiao.

I also have Doc Fai Wong's Shaolin Five Animal book and video. It is the same form taught by Sin The. The way I learned it from Soards, some of the movements which make it obvious that it is from a Choy Li Fut lineage were altered (the rear arm swinging). As this particular form I don't think anyone has seen anywhere except from Lau Bun's Hung Sing Choy Li Fut, I think it's pretty clear that is where Sin The got it. The book was published in 1988. When did Sin The start teaching it?

Yes, Sin The could have learned these styles actual people, as they are all pretty common. Given that he came to the US in 1963, there is no way he learned the tai chi or bagua before then, as the teachers of the forms we use were still alive and living in Taiwan and China respectively. It is possible he learned xingyi as a boy, but I doubt it, given the style of the material he started out teaching, which uses no xingyi mechanics. At best, they were learned from colleagues or seminars or private lessons, and he never told anyone who his actual teachers were. Maybe some people feel that it isn't important that he do so, that it doesn't matter where anything came from, as long as you "win the fight". But at the very least, no one should be advertising or talking as though everything they teach is an ancient tradition direct from the shaolin temple. They should be saying when asked that the basic material is from Sin The's interpretation of the material he learned as a boy (18 is still a boy). The rest is borrowed from various modern and traditional sources in order to introduce variety and create a diverse and fun curriculum.

[Leto]

Someone made a comment about the knee slapping. Slapping of the knees, elbows, is pretty common among indonesian kuntao systems.
Maybe in the end it is a kuntao system after all.

The black tigers, at least the wounded tiger, also give me an Indonesia/Sundanese feel as well. The cleary have Chinese movements in there, but there is a flair which I also note in watching Silat Cimande performances. I could just be seeing ghosts. I also see northern shaolin in shorin ryu karate, and most everyone thinks that is crazy, too.

[bodhi warrior]

I agree. There are moves that have a distinct Silat feel.
On a side note. I've seen Master Hiang perform the fire whip in public. And even though he's older now he's still quite good. It's my opinion he definetly received training from teachers.

[kwaichang]

It is thought that GMT was the Master of the Golden Snake and minor in other less prevalent forms. The others added later from Books , Videos etc. Many of the old Kung Fu films talk of books from styles and how special they were. I assume many Sifu write down their forms and drawings etc, even Bruce Lee did it. But that does not forgive the Shaolin Thing going on and Lying about it. I enjoy many of the forms and training and will continue with some changes. The Hua , the Tiger Crane The Pa Kua , etc. Well anyway, I feel when he came over all he had to teach was GS and his brother the Tai Pang and one guy in Indonesia was taught the 8 Immortals and so on until all Master Ie had was passed on. Thats what I feel is the way all this started. KC

[RJ797]

The SD Chen Tai Chi form is the 83 Move New Frame form. When Chen Xiaoxing saw it performed on the 1998 China Trip he told Sin The' it was a 17th Generation form.

[MasterKiller]

I feel when he came over all he had to teach was GS

Except no one has learned Golden Snake, right?

[David Jamieson]

Old Man,
This is something I have heard before from good sources and I believe to be true. Can you tell us more of the history and the ties to Shaolin?

If it was a legal proceeding then there is a transcript available.
Why not just ask for that? Boom done. no argument about it.

and, why would one say one thing in court and the other say another?
That would put them both in a position to be charged and convicted of perjury.